首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >A Direct Morphometric Comparison of Five Labeling Protocols for Multi-Atlas Driven Automatic Segmentation of the Hippocampus in Alzheimer’s Disease
【2h】

A Direct Morphometric Comparison of Five Labeling Protocols for Multi-Atlas Driven Automatic Segmentation of the Hippocampus in Alzheimer’s Disease

机译:五种标记方案对阿尔茨海默病患中海马驱动自动分割的直接形态学比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Hippocampal volumetry derived from structural MRI is increasingly used to delineate regions of interest for functional measurements, assess efficacy in therapeutic trials of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and has been endorsed by the new AD diagnostic guidelines as a radiological marker of disease progression. Unfortunately, morphological heterogeneity in AD can prevent accurate demarcation of the hippocampus. Recent developments in automated volumetry commonly use multitemplate fusion driven by expert manual labels, enabling highly accurate and reproducible segmentation in disease and healthy subjects. However, there are several protocols to define the hippocampus anatomically in vivo, and the method used to generate atlases may impact automatic accuracy and sensitivity – particularly in pathologically heterogeneous samples. Here we report a fully automated segmentation technique that provides a robust platform to directly evaluate both technical and biomarker performance in AD among anatomically unique labeling protocols. For the first time we test head-to-head the performance of five common hippocampal labeling protocols for multi-atlas based segmentation, using both the Sunnybrook Longitudinal Dementia Study and the entire Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 1 (ADNI-1) baseline and 24-month dataset. We based these atlas libraries on the protocols of (; ; ; ; ), and a single operator performed all manual tracings to generate de facto “ground truth” labels. All methods distinguished between normal elders, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and AD in the expected directions, and showed comparable correlations with measures of episodic memory performance. Only more inclusive protocols distinguished between stable MCI and MCI-to-AD converters, and had slightly better associations with episodic memory. Moreover, we demonstrate that protocols including more posterior anatomy and dorsal white matter compartments furnish the best voxel-overlap accuracies (Dice Similarity Coefficient = 0.87–0.89), compared to expert manual tracings, and achieve the smallest sample sizes required to power clinical trials in MCI and AD. The greatest distribution of errors was localized to the caudal hippocampus and alveus-fimbria compartment when these regions were excluded. The definition of the medial body did not significantly alter accuracy among more comprehensive protocols. Voxel-overlap accuracies between automatic and manual labels were lower for the more pathologically heterogeneous Sunnybrook study in comparison to the ADNI-1 sample. Finally, accuracy among protocols appears to significantly differ the most in AD subjects compared to MCI and normal elders. Together, these results suggest that selection of a candidate protocol for fully automatic multi-template based segmentation in AD can influence both segmentation accuracy when compared to expert manual labels and performance as a biomarker in MCI and AD.
机译:来自结构MRI的海马容积法被越来越多地用于勾画感兴趣的区域以进​​行功能测量,评估阿尔茨海默氏病(AD)的治疗试验的功效,并且新的AD诊断指南已将其认可为疾病进展的放射学标记。不幸的是,AD的形态异质性会阻止海马的准确分界。自动化容积技术的最新发展通常使用由专家手动标签驱动的多模板融合,从而可以在疾病和健康受试者中实现高度准确且可重复的分割。但是,有几种方案可以在体内从解剖学上定义海马体,并且用于生成图谱的方法可能会影响自动准确性和灵敏度,尤其是在病理学上异质的样品中。在这里,我们报告了一种全自动的分割技术,该技术提供了一个强大的平台,可以直接评估解剖学上唯一的标记协议中AD中的技术和生物标记物性能。我们首次使用Sunnybrook纵向痴呆研究以及整个阿尔茨海默氏病神经影像学倡议1(ADNI-1)基线和24-进行了针对多图集分割的五个常见海马标记方案的性能面对面的首次测试。月数据集。我们将这些地图集库基于(;;;;)协议,并且由一个操作员执行所有手动跟踪以生成事实上的“地面真相”标签。所有方法均在正常方向,轻度认知障碍(MCI)和AD方面按预期的方向进行区分,并显示出与情景记忆表现的测量指标具有可比的相关性。在稳定的MCI和MCI-AD转换器之间,只有更具包容性的协议有所区别,并且与情节记忆的关联性更好。此外,我们证明,与专家手动追踪相比,包括更多后部解剖结构和背侧白质隔室的方案具有最佳的体素重叠精度(骰子相似性系数= 0.87–0.89),并获得了用于进行临床试验所需的最小样本量MCI和AD。当排除这些区域时,最大的误差分布位于尾部海马区和肺泡-纤维膜区室。在更全面的方案中,内侧体的定义并未显着改变准确性。与ADNI-1样本相比,在病理上更加异构的Sunnybrook研究中,自动标签和手动标签之间的体素重叠精度较低。最后,与MCI和正常老年人相比,AD受试者之间的方案准确性似乎有很大差异。总之,这些结果表明,与专家手册标签相比,针对AD中基于全自动多模板的自动切分的候选方案的选择既会影响切分准确性,又会影响MCI和AD中作为生物标志物的性能。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号